What happened
The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.
(.19)On July 1, 1999, at 2040 central daylight time, a Piper PA-24-260 airplane, N5788, was substantially damaged when it impacted terrain following a complete loss of engine power while on approach to the west Houston airport near Houston, Texas. The pilot, who was one of four partners who owned the airplane, and her three passengers were not injured. Visual meteorological condtions prevailed for the 14 CFR part 91 personal flight and no flight plan was filed. The flight originated from the new braunfels municipal airport, new braunfels, Texas, at 1950. Accordng to the pilot, the airplane was on a VFR approach to runway 15 at the west Houston airport. She maneuvered the airplane onto a left downwind. The airplane was level at 1,000 fet AGL and abeam the numbers when she extended the landing gear, simultaneously she heard a "loud bang," and there was a complete loss of engine power. She added that the instrument panel "flickered," and the illumination failed. She executed a forced landing to runway 15. The nose wheel contacted a cement drainage area at the approach end of the runway and collapsed. Subsequently, the left main landing penetrated the wing structure, and the airplane came to rest upright on the runway. (.4) the pilot failed to maintain the proper descent rate during a VFR approach, in dusk light conditions, following a complete loss of engine power, and the airplane undershot the runway. The airplane was on the downwind leg at 1,100 feet AGL and was abeam the runway numbers when the pilot extended the landing gear. Simultaneously, she heard a loud bang and noticed a loss of engine power. The pilot advanced the throttle and realized that the engine had lost total power. The pilot stated that she trimmed the airplane to attain the best glide speed, but did not verify the airspeed during the ensuing forced landing. She added that the airplane was descending 'too fast,' and she needed 'more trim to relieve back pressure, but decided to muscle it as best [she] could and try not to stall the airplane.' Subsequently, the airplane's nose wheel contacted a cement drainage ditch at the approach end of the runway. Following the accident, the engine was test run in the airframe and found to operate within the manufacturer's specifications. (-23) pilot stated that she raised the nose of the airplane on downwind to dissipate airspeed from 140 mph to 130 mph and lowered the landing gear. She stated that the gear seemed to "bang" into the down and locked position and that she noticed a flicker in the instrument panel lights and a loss of engine power. She stated that she "shoved" the throttle forward and then had no engine power. She made an emergency landing with landing gear and flaps down short of the hard surfaced runway on the upslope of a drainage culvert. All three landing gear were substantially damaged along with the propeller, wings and horizontal stabilizer. No people were injured. Post accident inspection and engine run could not determine that any pre-accident mechanical discrepancies existed. Pilot will be re-examined on engine control management and emergency landings.
As the FAA filed it
(.19)ON JULY 1, 1999, AT 2040 CENTRAL DAYLIGHT TIME, A PIPER PA-24-260 AIRPLANE, N5788, WAS SUBSTANTIALLY DAMAGED WHEN IT IMPACTED TERRAIN FOLLOWING A COMPLETE LOSS OF ENGINE POWER WHILE ON APPROACH TO THE WEST HOUSTON AIRPORT NEAR HOUSTON, TEXAS. THE PILOT, WHO WAS ONE OF FOUR PARTNERS WHO OWNED THE AIRPLANE, AND HER THREE PASSENGERS WERE NOT INJURED. VISUAL METEOROLOGICAL CONDTIONS PREVAILED FOR THE 14 CFR PART 91 PERSONAL FLIGHT AND NO FLIGHT PLAN WAS FILED. THE FLIGHT ORIGINATED FROM THE NEW BRAUNFELS MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, NEW BRAUNFELS, TEXAS, AT 1950. ACCORDNG TO THE PILOT, THE AIRPLANE WAS ON A VFR APPROACH TO RUNWAY 15 AT THE WEST HOUSTON AIRPORT. SHE MANEUVERED THE AIRPLANE ONTO A LEFT DOWNWIND. THE AIRPLANE WAS LEVEL AT 1,000 FET AGL AND ABEAM THE NUMBERS WHEN SHE EXTENDED THE LANDING GEAR, SIMULTANEOUSLY SHE HEARD A "LOUD BANG," AND THERE WAS A COMPLETE LOSS OF ENGINE POWER. SHE ADDED THAT THE INSTRUMENT PANEL "FLICKERED," AND THE ILLUMINATION FAILED. SHE EXECUTED A FORCED LANDING TO RUNWAY 15. THE NOSE WHEEL CONTACTED A CEMENT DRAINAGE AREA AT THE APPROACH END OF THE RUNWAY AND COLLAPSED. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE LEFT MAIN LANDING PENETRATED THE WING STRUCTURE, AND THE AIRPLANE CAME TO REST UPRIGHT ON THE RUNWAY. (.4) THE PILOT FAILED TO MAINTAIN THE PROPER DESCENT RATE DURING A VFR APPROACH, IN DUSK LIGHT CONDITIONS, FOLLOWING A COMPLETE LOSS OF ENGINE POWER, AND THE AIRPLANE UNDERSHOT THE RUNWAY. THE AIRPLANE WAS ON THE DOWNWIND LEG AT 1,100 FEET AGL AND WAS ABEAM THE RUNWAY NUMBERS WHEN THE PILOT EXTENDED THE LANDING GEAR. SIMULTANEOUSLY, SHE HEARD A LOUD BANG AND NOTICED A LOSS OF ENGINE POWER. THE PILOT ADVANCED THE THROTTLE AND REALIZED THAT THE ENGINE HAD LOST TOTAL POWER. THE PILOT STATED THAT SHE TRIMMED THE AIRPLANE TO ATTAIN THE BEST GLIDE SPEED, BUT DID NOT VERIFY THE AIRSPEED DURING THE ENSUING FORCED LANDING. SHE ADDED THAT THE AIRPLANE WAS DESCENDING 'TOO FAST,' AND SHE NEEDED 'MORE TRIM TO RELIEVE BACK PRESSURE, BUT DECIDED TO MUSCLE IT AS BEST [SHE] COULD AND TRY NOT TO STALL THE AIRPLANE.' SUBSEQUENTLY, THE AIRPLANE'S NOSE WHEEL CONTACTED A CEMENT DRAINAGE DITCH AT THE APPROACH END OF THE RUNWAY. FOLLOWING THE ACCIDENT, THE ENGINE WAS TEST RUN IN THE AIRFRAME AND FOUND TO OPERATE WITHIN THE MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS. (-23) PILOT STATED THAT SHE RAISED THE NOSE OF THE AIRPLANE ON DOWNWIND TO DISSIPATE AIRSPEED FROM 140 MPH TO 130 MPH AND LOWERED THE LANDING GEAR. SHE STATED THAT THE GEAR SEEMED TO "BANG" INTO THE DOWN AND LOCKED POSITION AND THAT SHE NOTICED A FLICKER IN THE INSTRUMENT PANEL LIGHTS AND A LOSS OF ENGINE POWER. SHE STATED THAT SHE "SHOVED" THE THROTTLE FORWARD AND THEN HAD NO ENGINE POWER. SHE MADE AN EMERGENCY LANDING WITH LANDING GEAR AND FLAPS DOWN SHORT OF THE HARD SURFACED RUNWAY ON THE UPSLOPE OF A DRAINAGE CULVERT. ALL THREE LANDING GEAR WERE SUBSTANTIALLY DAMAGED ALONG WITH THE PROPELLER, WINGS AND HORIZONTAL STABILIZER. NO PEOPLE WERE INJURED. POST ACCIDENT INSPECTION AND ENGINE RUN COULD NOT DETERMINE THAT ANY PRE-ACCIDENT MECHANICAL DISCREPANCIES EXISTED. PILOT WILL BE RE-EXAMINED ON ENGINE CONTROL MANAGEMENT AND EMERGENCY LANDINGS.
NTSB investigation
The NTSB’s investigation of this event, with its probable cause and findings. Matched to this report by N-number and date.